Genesis 38:6-30 is a doozy of a tale, and is the title story in a book called “The Harlot by the Side of the Road”, subtitled “Forbidden Stories of the Bible”. “Forbidden”, because you are not likely to hear about them from your priest, pastor, or rabbi, and many weekly lectionaries will likely leave them out.
There’s also a story about Lot’s daughters sleeping with their father after he’s passed out drunk (it’s after the events of Sodom and Gemorrah, and they think they’re the last human beings on Earth), there’s one about the son of a prince seducing a daughter of Isaac and Rebekah and the painful consequences that followed for the prince’s fellow tribesmen, there’s one about God conspiring to murder Moses for not being circumcised.
People want to dress up the Bible, make it out like it’s all sweetness and light. In fact, the Bible shows people in all their complexity.

DR

And who could forget 2 Kings 2:23-25? A heartwarming tale about the prophet Elisha and the cuddly bears that God sent to maul a group of kids for the unforgivable and thoroughly detestable crime of making fun of Elisha’s baldness.

peterpi

Too bad those bears aren’t still around. They’d come in handy over at the offices of the makers of Rogaine and other sure-fire baldness cures.

DR

LOL 🙂

Guest

Atheist loons like you and Peterpi will never understand the Bible because you are blinded by your own arrogance. Maybe if you spent less time criticizing things you don’t understand you would see the error of your ways.

reinhold23

How do you know that they’re not believers in some other religion? You just assume they’re atheists.

Nice defense of the Bible’s ridiculousness, by the way. Oh wait…

toohip

Note how conservatives always try to define what and who their opposition is, in lieu of arguing the point. This is called an ad hominem fallacy, specifically the “guilt by association” attack. That does like this. .

1. Source S makes claim C.

2. Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.

3. Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.

It’s pretty well known that North American loons are Methodists, whereas loons from the British Isles, or divers, are agnostic, although some tend toward druidism.

ThePyro

Erm…I was under the impression North American Loons were primarily Lutherans. I don’t think their habitat can be in Minnesota and Wisconsin otherwise.

peterpi

🙂

primafacie

Ha!

peterpi

Then there’s the older loons from the British Isles who are Church of England, but their numbers are dwindling.

peterpi

I’m not atheist — there’s nothing wrong with people who are — I’m an agnostic. I believe in God, but have no knowledge about God’s nature.
You’d be royally PO’d if someone used “Christian” as an epithet, so why use “atheist” as one?
Regarding arrogance, since you are a big fan of the Bible, you might want to read up on what Jesus of Nazareth says about splinters and beams.
All I said was that the Bible isn’t some touchy feely book. The Bible is one of the most widely-sold and least-read books out there.

toohip

Imagine. . if the Christians could “amend” the bible (I didn’t capitalize that word just to get to Robtf and the rest of the usual suspects :o)

DR

They already do. Just read Rob”s post below! (I was wondering how long it would take for him or someone else to bring up that moral vs judicial vs. ceremonial law bullsh!t.)

peterpi

It’s a way for them to say “We don’t have to pay attention to The Law, St. Peter and St. Paul told us so, but we can beat you guys over the head with it!!!”

Guest

But I do like the fact that the Jews and then the Christians consider infanticide to be a crime where exposure was practiced by the Romans and most other early civilizations. But it seems in this case the left is advocating for a 2000 year old practice as being morally acceptable.

toohip

get that from the bible?

Guest

Actually you can quote almost anything from the Bible so I simply put in the practice of Christians and Jews. But if you want a passage it is Acts 7:19. But there a lot more condemning killing children even as sacrifices to God.

People who claim to believe everything in the Bible obviously haven’t read it.

toohip

they do read it, but only specific passages, then go and get the official interpretation from people who claim to be men of God. (note capitalization!)

Guest22

“Why me, Lord? I’ve always been good. I don’t drink or dance or swear, I’ve even kept kosher just to be on the safe side. I’ve done everything the Bible says! Even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff! What more can I do?”
— Ned Flanders

The original letter writer (Mr. Stuckey) simply has a problem with LGBT people. It leads me to observe that perhaps he doth protest too mcuh.

toohip

Unlike our “sacred” constitution which is a living document, the bible is not allowed to be rewritten, but even today there are “bible study groups” in churches “interpreting” what the bible means, what it doesn’t not mean, and ignoring the rest. The same people who believe the bible is the direct word of God, also tend to believe the Constitution is sacred and was not meant to be changed. . though it has been “amended” 17 times because it didn’t match the times. We keep the 3rd amendment, though it doesn’t match the times because the 2nd amendment is “so close” (literally and figuratively) because certain people want it to mean something it was never meant to mean.
Ah, yes, sacred documents written by old white men, trying to stand the test of modern times!

primafacie

Leviticus was a hard-core son of a gun.

holyreality

Why the Judaic tribe’s version of the creator lies at the root of the dark ages.

Their little invisible man who lives in the clouds was a jealous, insecure, and bloodthirsty tyrant. Why I should believe in “him” or even worship him is beyond logic and reason. I mean he allegedly loves us but if we piss him off, we are doomed to Hades.

Flying Spaghetti monster all the way.

Robtf777

“A letter-writer bemoans Colorado civil unions, and claims there’s “no
evidence in the teachings of the church and Holy Scripture to suggest
that God’s laws … have changed.”

The Letter Writer appears to be a typical Liberal…….who gloats and drools whenever they……in pure ignorance……attempt to apply Biblical Morals to current situations……as if to say, “See, we can encourage homosexual sexual immorality because you don’t advocate stoning children.”

One must feel……much sorrow and sadness……to those who actually write a Letter that proves their ignorance……as well as to those who post Posts who express similar…..ignorance.

So……how do we, as the body of Christ, counteract such joyfully and mockingly expressed ignorance?

(1) We could ignore it……leaving the willfully ignorant to continue in their chosen lifestyle of blissful ignorance.

(2) We could point out the obvious…….but that does take time and written space.

I’ll choose the latter……and address the issue in its two basic arguments:

(1) The first counter-argument is to point out the obvious: “Two Wrongs NEVER make a right.” Thus pointing out additional laws one fails to obey does not make the first ones “right.” It only serves to show that one is well aware of even MORE LAWS one willfully disobeys.

But while “two wrongs NEVER make a right” works in some cases (linking adultery and homosexuality) it doesn’t work when one brings up other cases (trying to link homosexuality with stoning of children).

That’s where #2 comes in.

(2) The second counter-argument is (or at least was, even 30 years ago) found in the Presbyterian Book of Order (which other denominations likely have in some form or another since the basic concepts are (1) basic (2) simple).

Basically ALL the Old Testament Laws can be divided into three groups (1) Moral (2) Judicial (3) Ceremonial

Every single Old Testament Law can be put in ONE and ONLY ONE category. There are only about 614 Laws (much fewer than one will find under traffic laws, let alone including criminal and civil laws in Colorado).

And EVERY SINGLE LAW of those 614 is a Moral Law, a Judicial Law, or a Ceremonial Law..

Guess what……circumcision……is? It’s a ceremonial law.

Guess what……stoning laws…..are? They are judicial laws. Stoning is the rendering of punishment, NOT a definition of what activity is moral or immoral.

Guess what laws having to do with murder, stealing, coveting, being drunk, and engaging in sexually immoral activity are? They are…..moral laws.

Thus when someone tries to…..ignorantly…..equate “judicial/punishment laws” along with “homosexuality” under the umbrella of “moral laws”……they are doing nothing more than doing what Liberals typically do: show their lack of understanding in that Judicial Laws do NOT define moral or immoral behavior; Judicial Laws only render PUNISHMENT.

Now we get to the part that Liberals really can’t grasp: Understanding what Christ did and did NOT do by his death on the cross.

Very simply, Christ did away with most ceremonial and judicial laws……kept ALL the moral laws……and extended moral laws to include THOUGHTS (If you even hate……you have committed murder. If you so much as lust in your heart…..you have committed adultery).

The New Testament understanding is that we do NOT stone the sexually immoral…..even though sexual immorality is still wrong. The Moral Laws is kept; the Judicial Law was not.

It is STILL WRONG for children to disobey their parents. The Moral Law is still in place. But the Judicial Law of stoning one’s children to death has been replaced by the Cross……and the Grace and Love and Mercy Christ extended to……even us…..though we were still sinners.

The Moral Law of defining what is or is not Moral or Immoral Behaviors (or even thoughts) is still in place; the Judicial Laws regarding the rendering of the DEATH penalty for Non-Capital offenses was supposed to have ended at the Cross

(Note: God instituted the death penalty for murder in the days of Noah…….centuries before Moses ever came along.)

A Typical Non-Christian Liberal……who doesn’t understand the difference between Moral, Ceremonial, and Judicial Laws……and thinks that “they all must be Moral Laws”……..and who has no understanding of what Christ did and did NOT do on the Cross…….and proclaims “you don’t keep judicial laws so we don’t have to keep moral laws”…….is actually someone to……pity……because their blissful ignorance is…….really, really sad.

peterpi

Two wrongs don’t make a right, but three lefts do.

If you are going to play around with Orthodox Judaism to justify your conservative Christianity (a highly dubious theological proposition), then get your facts straight:
1) There are precisely and only 613 commandments in the Torah, period, according to Orthodox Judaism
2) An Orthodox Jew can easily argue that, regardless of the validity of your three categories there is no reason any one commandment couldn’t fall in one or more categories.
3) Lastly, the reason people talk about commandments about stoning or mixed fibers or whatever is, you Bible-pounding Christians want to pick and choose which ones are valid for yourself, while insisting others obey them.
Of those 613 commandments, approximately 200 relate to Temple worship, and since there is no Temple to worship in, those commandments are in abeyance unless and until the Temple is rebuilt by the real Messiah — not the Anti-Christ of your eschatological fantasies, which, according to you, we Jews will foolishly fall for, the real one. That leaves over 400, and believe me, I know plenty of Orthodox Jews who try to fulfill as many of those as is humanly possible. Why? They think all the commandments are important, not just the ones they want to punish others with, while holding themselves above them.
They “don’t” buy clothing with mixed fibers, for example. They “do” scrupulously try to follow the laws concerning the Sabbath, for another example. Now, they stumble and make mistakes, they’re human. But they don’t play games “Oh, this applies to YOU! But ‘I’ don’t have to follow it!”
And, my personal experience is, most of them are polite towards gay people. Most of them respect the fact that in this secular society, gay people have as much right to change the laws as any other group of people.
In other words, they are tolerant of others. Imagine that.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.